INV-FLOW: New Possibilities to Evaluate the Technical Condition and Function of Extraction Wells
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Apparatus Design
- Two pneumatic packers to seal the measured section of the extraction well. A through-flow pipe passes through the center of the packers. The packer’s bodies can accommodate three independent cables sealed at the flanges using watertight bushings. In the case of the INV-FLOW apparatus, these cables are used for (i) the electrical connection of the pump, (ii) the supply of compressed air for controlling the packers, and (iii) the electrical signal from the electromagnetic flowmeter.
- A pump located in the area between the packers, enabling the smooth regulation of the output.
- An electromagnetic flowmeter located at the ground surface for measuring the flow rate of water pumped from the extraction well.
- An electromagnetic flowmeter located under the lower packer inside the extraction well to measure the flow rate of water pumped through the lower packer.
2.3. Laboratory Experiments
- Without clogging: glass beads of fraction d = 3–5 mm;
- Affected by clogging: a mixture of glass beads of fraction d = 3–5 mm and filter sand of fraction d = 0.5–1 mm.
- dm (m)—inner diameter of the laboratory model of a hydrogeological well;
- dw (m)—outer diameter of the hydrogeological casing;
- Ao (m2)—area of the flow profile of the gravel pack;
- L (m)—height of the gravel pack.
- Qc (l/s)—total water flow in circulation;
- Qp (l/s)—water flow through the packer;
- H1 (m)—piezometric level in the DN300 flow profile (laboratory model);
- H2 (m)—piezometric level in the equalizing tank.
- Qo (m3/s)—component of vertical flow through the gravel pack;
- I (-)—hydraulic gradient;
- Ko (m/s)—hydraulic conductivity of the gravel pack.
2.4. Pilot Site, Geological and Hydrogeological Properties
- The well is operated as an extraction well;
- The results of pumping and recovery tests, geophysical logging and camera inspections of the extraction well are available;
- The well screen is located at a depth of <25 m below ground level (the depth range of the functional INV-FLOW apparatus);
- An observation well is in the vicinity of the measured extraction well;
- The extraction well casing diameter is in the range DN 175–DN 300 (range of the used functional INV-FLOW apparatus);
- There is variability between the tested extraction wells concerning the age of the extraction well and the well casing material.
2.5. Hadačka Pilot Site
- 0–6 m b.g.l. steel well casing, DN 219/200;
- 6–27 m b.g.l. steel well screen, DN 219/200;
- 27–31 m b.g.l. steel well casing, DN 219/200.
- Signs of severe well clogging were present in the entire well screen;
- The well casing was damaged in the area 20.2–23.0 m b.g.l.
- A low degree of compaction of the gravel pack at 12–13 m b.g.l.—this section was considered to be the most permeable part of the extraction well with the lowest degree of clogging;
- Narrowing of the extraction well casing by up to 15 mm in section 17–17.5 m b.g.l., which was considered the area with the highest degree of clogging of the extraction well, showing the nature of incrustation.
- 0–14 m b.g.l. PVC well casing, DN 175 (195/8.5);
- 14–27 m b.g.l. PVC well screen, DN 175 (195/8.5);
- 27–35 m b.g.l. PVC well casing, DN 175 (195/8.5);
- 35–50 m b.g.l. PVC well screen, DN 175 (195/8.5);
- 50–54 m b.g.l. PVC well casing, DN 175 (195/8.5).
2.6. Pilot Test Experiments
- One profile was measured—17.05 m b.g.l.;
- Eleven different flow rates Qc were set, from 0.18 l/s to 1.11 l/s.
- Two profiles were measured—11.75 m b.g.l. and 15.75 m b.g.l.
- In each profile, 13 different flow rates Qc were set, from 0.1 l/s to 0.8 l/s.
- Nine profiles were measured, from 11.45 m b.g.l. to 19.45 m b.g.l.
- In each of the profiles, seven different flow rates Qc were set, from 0.06 l/s to 0.61 l/s.
- According to the logging measurements , the water inflow from the surrounding aquifer was zero (Qin = 0) in the entire measured profile, mainly due to a high degree of clogging and incrustation of the well. Logging measurements showed only an upward flow of groundwater in the extraction well.
- Three pressure sensors were attached to the INV-FLOW apparatus to check the correct installation and operation of the apparatus. One sensor was located above the upper pneumatic packer, one in the space between the two packers near the pump, and the third below the lower pneumatic packer.
3. Results and Discussion
3.1. Laboratory Experiments
3.1.1. Scenario A
3.1.2. Scenario B
3.1.3. Scenario C
3.2. Pilot Test Experiments
3.2.1. Pilot Tests Carried Out on 2 July 2020: HJ-4 Extraction Well
- Hydraulic conductivity of the aquifer in the surroundings of the HJ-4 extraction well: K = 1.75 × 10−6 m/s (Table 3);
- Radius of the HJ-4 casing: rv = 0.0875 m (Figure 2);
- Distance between the observation well (HJ-3) and the pumped extraction well (HJ-4): RPV1 = 20 m (Figure 2);
- Distance between pneumatic packers: L = 2.1 m (Figure 2);
- The thickness of the aquifer in the measured extraction well HJ-4 at the maximum pumping Qc = 1.11 l/s: hV = 49.1 m (the aquifer was calculated by subtracting the measured groundwater level in the extraction well HJ-4, 4.9 m b.g.l., from the total depth of the extraction well HJ-4 that reaches the base of the aquifer, 54 m b.g.l.);
- Aquifer thickness in the observation well HJ-3 at the maximum pumping Qc = 1.11 l/s: hV1 = 50.31 m (the aquifer thickness was calculated by subtracting the measured groundwater level in the HJ-3 observation well, 3.69 m b.g.l., from the total depth of the HJ-4 extraction well that reaches the aquifer base, 54 m b.g.l.); due to the small distance between extraction well HJ-4 and observation well HJ-3, the base of the aquifer can be considered to be approximately the same depth.
3.2.2. Pilot Tests Carried Out on 2 July 2020: HJ-3 Extraction Well
3.2.3. Pilot Tests Carried Out on 28 July 2020: HJ-3 Extraction Well
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
- Betuš, Z.; Pinka, J. Hydrogeologické Vrty; Štroffek: Košice, Slovakia, 1998; p. 223. ISBN 80888896274. [Google Scholar]
- Ghosh, C.; Yasuhara, K. Ultrasonic Removal of Clogging and Evaluation of Flow Capacity of Geotextile Drain. Indian Geotech. J. 2021, 51, 539–551. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, H.; Liu, Z.; Morató, J.; Hu, Z.; Zhuang, L.; Kang, X.; Pang, Y. Evaluation of substrate clogging in a full-scale horizontal subsurface flow treatment wetland using electrical resistivity tomography with an optimized electrode configuration. Sci. Total Environ. 2022, 824, 153981. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sterrett, R.J. Groundwater and Wel, 3rd ed.; John son Screens: New Brighton, MN, USA, 2007; p. 86. ISBN 978-0-9787793-0-6. [Google Scholar]
- Bláha, P.; Lukeš, J. Co můžeme najít v zapažených průzkumných vrtech? Sborník vědeckých prací Vysoké školy báňské-Technické univerzity Ostrava. Řada Stavební 2005, 5, 1–9. Available online: http://hdl.handle.net/10084/84579. (accessed on 8 February 2022). (In Czech).
- Hanák, D. Zpracování komplexního karotážního měření. Diploma Thesis, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic, 2008. Available online: https://home.czu.cz/storage/575/52485_Hanak-2018.pdf (accessed on 19 June 2022). (In Czech).
- Skryté a Úmyslné Vady ve Výstroji Vrtů. Available online: https://voda.tzb-info.cz/vlastnosti-a-zdroje-vody/19085-skryte-a-umyslne-vady-ve-vystroji-vrtu (accessed on 31 March 2022). (In Czech).
- Blair, A.H. Screens and Gravel Packs. Ground Water 1970, 8, 10–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- California Department of Water Resources. Cathodic Protection Standards. Southern District. 1998. Available online: https://water.ca.gov/ (accessed on 19 June 2022).
- Company, R.M. Handbook of Ground Water Development, 1st ed.; Roscoe Moss Company: Los Angeles, CA, USA; John Wiley & Sons, Inc.: New York, NY, USA, 1990; p. 493. ISBN 978-0-471-85611-5. [Google Scholar]
- Adebayo, A.R.; Bageri, B.S. A simple NMR methodology for evaluating filter cake properties and formation damage induced by drilling fluid-induced formation damage. J. Pet. Explor. Prod. Technol. 2019, 9, 1643–1655. [Google Scholar]
- Ma, C.; Deng, J.; Dong, X.; Sun, D.; Feng Luo Xiao, Q.; Chen, J. A new laboratory protocol to study the plugging and sand control performance of sand control screens. J. Pet. Sci. Eng. 2020, 184, 106548. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Van Beek CG, E.M.; Breedveld RJ, M.; Juhász-Holterman, M.; Oosterhof, A.; Stuyfzand, P.J. Cause and prevention of well bore clogging by particles. Hydrogeol. J. Off. J. Int. Assoc. Hydrogeol. 2009, 17, 1877–1886. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Houben, G.; Treskatis, C. Water Well Rehabilitation and Reconstruction, 3rd ed.; McGraw Hill Professional: New York, NY, USA, 2007; ISBN 0-07-148651-8. [Google Scholar]
- Houben, G.J. Iron oxide incrustations in Wells—Part 1: Genesis, mineralogy and geochemist Try. Appl. Geochem. 2003, 18, 927–939. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bageri, B.S.; Al-Mutairi, S.H.; Mahmoud, M.A. Different techniques for characterizing the filter cake. Presented at the SPE Unconventional Gas Conference and Exhibition, Muscat, Oman, 28–30 January 2013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Payne, F.; Quinnan, J.; Potter, S. Remediation Hydraulics; CRC Press: London, UK, 2008; p. 432. ISBN 978-0849372490. [Google Scholar]
- Dausse, A.; Guihéneufa, N.; Parker, B.L. Impact of flow geometry on parameter uncertainties for underdamped slug tests in fractured rocks. J. Hydrol. 2021, 592, 125567. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lei Wang, L.; Xiang, Y.; Hu, J.; Li, T.; Cai, C.; Cai, J. Unsteady flow to a partially penetrating pumping well with wellbore storage in a dual-permeability confined aquifer. J. Hydrol. 2020, 591, 125345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, H.; Wang, Y.; Pang, M.; Fang, T.; Zhao, S.; Wang, Z.; Zhou, Y. Research on Plugging Mechanism and Optimisation of Plug Removal Measure of Polymer Flooding Response Well in Bohai Oilfield. Int. Pet. Technol. 2021, 23, 1–3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Iscan, A.G.; Kok, M.V.; Bagci, A.S. Permeability Reduction Due to Formation Damage by Drilling Fluids. Energy Sources 2007, 29, 851–859. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Patel, M.C.; Singh, A. Near Wellbore Damage and Types of Skin Depending on Mechanism of Damage. In Proceedings of the Society of Petroleum Engineers SPE International Conference and Exhibition on Formation Damage Control, Lafayette, LA, USA, 24–26 February 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Morozov, P.E. Groundwater Flow Near a Vertical Circulation Well with a Skin-Effect. Water Resour. 2021, 48, 737–745. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Watlton, W.C. Aquifer Test Modeling, 1st ed.; CRC Press: Boca Ralton, FL, USA, 2007; p. 240. ISBN 978-1-4200-4292-4. [Google Scholar]
- Liu, P.C.; Li, W.H.; Xia, J.; Jiao, Y.W.; Bie, A.F. Derivation and application of mathematical model for well test analysis with variable skin factor in hydrocarbon reservoirs. AIP Adv. 2016, 6, 065324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mansuy, N. Water Well Rehabilitation; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2017; pp. 113–149. [Google Scholar]
- Abramova, A.V.; Abramov, V.O.; Bayazitov, V.M.; Nikonov, R.V. A method for water well regeneration based on shock waves and ultrasound. Ultrason. Sonochemistry 2017, 36, 375–385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pitrak, M.; Mares, S.; Kobr, M. A simple borehole dilution technique in measuring horizontal ground water flow. GroundWater 2007, 45, 89–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Batu, V. Aquifer Hydraulics: A Comprehensive Guide to Hydrogeologic Data Analysis; John Wiley & Sons: New York, NY, USA, 1998; p. 727. ISBN 0-471-18502-7. [Google Scholar]
- Horne, R.N. Modern Well Test Analysis: A Computer Aided Approach, 4th ed.; Alto, P., Ed.; Petroway, Inc.: Palo Alto, CA, USA, 1995; p. 185. ISBN 0-9626992-09.55. [Google Scholar]
- Kabala, Z.J. Sensitivity analysis of a pumping test on a well with wellbore storage and skin. Adv. Water Resour. 2001, 24, 483–504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, C.; Lan, C. A simple data analysis method for a pumping test with skin and wellbore storage effect. Terr. Atmos. Ocean. Sci. 2009, 20, 557–562. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Ramey, H.H., Jr. Interpretation of short-time well test data in the presence of skin effect and well bore storage. J. Pet. Technol. 1970, 22, 97–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yeh, H.D.; Chang, Y.C. Recent advances in modeling of well hydraulics. Adv. Water Resour. 2013, 51, 27–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Agarwal, R.G.; Al-Hussainy, R.; Ramey, H.J. An investigation of well storage and skin effect in unsteady liquid flow: I. Analytical treatment. Soc. Pet. Eng. J. 1970, 10, 279–291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Papadopulos, I.S.; Cooper, H.H. Drawdown in a well of large diameter. Water Resour. Res. 1967, 3, 241–244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stehfest, H. Algorithm 368: Numerical inversion of Laplace transforms. Commun. ACM 1970, 13, 47–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cooper, H.H.; Jacob, C.E. A generalized graphical method for evaluating formation constants and summarizing well-field history. Trans. Am. Geophys. Union 1946, 27, 526–534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kahuda, D.; Pech, P. A new method for evaluation of well rehabilitation from the early-portion of the pumping test. Water 2020, 12, 744. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Ficaj, V.; Pech, P.; Kahuda, D. Software for Evaluating Pumping Tests on Real Wells. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 3182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kahuda, D.; Pech, P.; Ficaj, V.; Pechová, H. Well Rehabilitation via the Ultrasonic Method and Evaluation of Its Effectiveness from the Pumping Test. Coatings 2021, 11, 1250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Van Everdingen, A.F.; Hurst, W. The Application of the Laplace Transformation to Flow problems in reservoirs. J. Pet. Technol. 1949, 1, 305–324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hawkins, M.F., Jr. A note on the skin effect. Trans. Am. Inst. Min. Metall. Eng. 1956, 8, 356–357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Darcy, H. Les Fontaines Publiques de la Ville de Dijon; Victor Dalmont, Editeur: Paris, France, 1856; p. 947. [Google Scholar]
- Vaněk, R. Zpráva o Hydrogeologickém Průzkumu v Hadačce-II. Etapa, Agroprojekt Praha, Závod Plzeň. 1975. Available online: https://storage/575/52485_Vanek-1975.pdf. (accessed on 19 June 2022). (In Czech).
- Procházka, M. Hadačka, Výrov u Kralovic, Zpráva o Karotážním Měření v Novém Vrtu HJ-4 a ve Starším Vrtu HJ-3, SG Geotechnika. 2020. Available online: https://home.czu.cz/storage/575/52485_Prochazka-2020.pdf (accessed on 31 March 2022). (In Czech).
- Kahuda, D. Hadačka, Mechanicko-Chemická Regenerace Jímacích Vrtů HJ-2 a HJ-3, Hydro Dynamické Zkoušky Jímacích Vrtů HJ-2 a HR-Závěrečná Zpráva, Vodní Zdroje. 2017. Available online: https://home.czu.cz/storage/575/52485_Kahuda-2017-VZ-ZZ.pdf (accessed on 31 March 2022). (In Czech).
- Kahuda, D. Projekt Geologických Prací, Hadačka, Průzkumný Hydrogeologický vrt HJ-4, Vodní Zdroje. 2020. Available online: https://home.czu.cz/storage/575/52485_Kahuda-2020.pdf (accessed on 19 June 2022). (In Czech).
|Scenario||Measurement No.||Scenario Description|
|A||1–4||Only one segment of the screen (lower part) was installed, a sealing packer located at the top of the installed laboratory model, and a gravel pack without clogging simulation.|
|B||1–4||Two segments of well screen and one sealing packer installed between them, and a gravel pack without clogging simulation.|
|C||1–6||Two segments of well screen and one sealing packer installed between them, and a gravel pack with clogging simulation.|
|Well Yield (l/s)||Initial GW Level Below Terrain (m)||GW Level Dropdown (m)||Specific Yield |
|Hydraulic Conductivity |
|Pumping test||1.33||2.57||14.7||0.09||6.43 × 10−4||2.26 × 10−5|
|Recovery test||1.52 × 10−5||5.36 × 10−7|
|Pumping test (1)||1.33||4.33||4.39||0.3||6.4 × 10−4||2.41 × 10−5|
|Pumping test (2)||3.43 × 10−4||1.29 × 10−5|
|Recovery test||5.46 × 10−4||2.05 × 10−5|
|Well Yield |
|Initial GW Level Below Terrain (m)||GW Level Dropdown |
|Specific Yield |
|Hydraulic Conductivity |
|Pumping test||1.25||3.86||6.33||0.2||4.33 × 10−5||8.64 × 10−7|
|Recovery test (1)||1.05 × 10−4||2.19 × 10−6|
|Recovery test (2)||1.05 × 10−4||2.19 × 10−6|
|Average: 1.75 × 10−6|
|No.||Qc (l/s)||Qp (l/s)||Qo (l/s)||Ha (m)||L (m)||I (-)||Ko (m/s)||Qo/Qc (%)|
|1||0.09||0.04||0.05||0.045||1.05||0.04||3.30 × 10−2||55.6|
|2||0.15||0.06||0.09||0.081||1.05||0.08||3.31 × 10−2||60.0|
|3||0.21||0.08||0.13||0.143||1.05||0.14||2.71 × 10−2||61.9|
|4||0.26||0.09||0.17||0.198||1.05||0.19||2.56 × 10−2||65.4|
|No.||Qc (l/s)||Qp (l/s)||Qo (l/s)||Ha (m)||L (m)||I (-)||Ko (m/s)||Qo/Qc (%)|
|1||0.26||0.11||0.15||0.228||1.52||0.15||2.83 × 10−2||57.7|
|2||0.09||0.05||0.04||0.065||1.63||0.04||2.84 × 10−2||44.4|
|3||0.14||0.07||0.07||0.100||1.62||0.06||3.21 × 10−2||50.0|
|4||0.19||0.09||0.1||0.154||1.58||0.10||2.91 × 10−2||52.6|
|No.||Qc (l/s)||Qp (l/s)||Qo (l/s)||H a (m)||L (m)||I (-)||Ko (m/s)||Qo/Qc (%)|
|1||0.24||0.23||0.01||0.076||1.47||0.05||5.48 × 10−3||4.2|
|2||0.134||0.13||0.004||0.026||1.48||0.02||6.45 × 10−3||2.9|
|3||0.178||0.17||0.008||0.042||1.48||0.03||7.79 × 10−3||4.4|
|4||0.226||0.215||0.011||0.067||1.47||0.05||7.09 × 10−3||5.0|
|5||0.09||0.087||0.003||0.016||1.48||0.01||7.08 × 10−3||3.0|
|6||0.139||0.133||0.006||0.026||1.48||0.02||9.20 × 10−3||4.1|
|No.||Pump Performance (%)||Qc|
|No.||Pump Performance (%)||Qc|
|No.||Pump Performance (%)||Qc|
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Kukačka, J.; Pech, P.; Ficaj, V.; Kahuda, D. INV-FLOW: New Possibilities to Evaluate the Technical Condition and Function of Extraction Wells. Water 2022, 14, 2005. https://doi.org/10.3390/w14132005
Kukačka J, Pech P, Ficaj V, Kahuda D. INV-FLOW: New Possibilities to Evaluate the Technical Condition and Function of Extraction Wells. Water. 2022; 14(13):2005. https://doi.org/10.3390/w14132005Chicago/Turabian Style
Kukačka, Jan, Pavel Pech, Václav Ficaj, and Daniel Kahuda. 2022. "INV-FLOW: New Possibilities to Evaluate the Technical Condition and Function of Extraction Wells" Water 14, no. 13: 2005. https://doi.org/10.3390/w14132005